[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: Minutes of an Ubuntu-Debian discussion that happened at Debconf

On Wed, 2006-06-28 at 14:34 +0100, Simon Huggins wrote:

> On Wed, Jun 28, 2006 at 12:17:45PM +0200, Raphael Hertzog wrote:
> > On Wed, 28 Jun 2006, Raphael Hertzog wrote:
> > > 1. Fix scott's patch repository: Ubuntu needs to keep a copy of the
> > > original Debian source package used to create their packages so that
> > > Ubuntu can always generate a useful patch without relying on
> > > snapshot.debian.net (which is unreliable and is not officially supported
> > > by the Debian project). Scott announced the "breakage" on debian-devel but
> > > it hasn't been fixed yet:
> > > http://lists.debian.org/debian-devel/2006/02/msg00798.html
> > The repository has moved to http://patches.ubuntu.com and Matt Zimmerman
> > told me it should be fixed. Scott, can you officially confirm this? I
> > would suggest a follow-up to your initial mail on debian-devel...
> It looks a lot more sane now but previously patches were split out into
> packaging differences, upstream differences, and branding differences
> (where possible).
> This was a lot more useful than the current situation which seems to
> just have one large diff again.  Not to say that making this large diff
> available /isn't/ useful just that if the old code could be resurrected
> to split it out further more people might take it on.
The main problem was that the splitting out code didn't actually work,
and just generated a random set of four or five patches.  I can restore
the code is people really think it was useful, but the general consensus
from every Debian person I spoke to was that they ignored those files
because they weren't helpful.

Scott James Remnant

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part

Reply to: